I haven't updated this blog in quite a while! I have been pretty busy with life, however I am now in the market for a budget 17" laptop after using a 17" Toshiba laptop while on vacation (and because I am going to be moving across the country in the upcoming weeks). After a lot of browsing, I discovered that Newegg has a 17" laptop with 3gb of RAM for $599. Besides the fact that this budget laptop has a 17" LCD, 3gb of memory and a 250gb HD, what's really amazing is the specifications list a battery life of three hours. I don't know if that is a typo, but I am really excited.
I can't find any reviews on the 'net of theAcer Extensa EX7620-4641, but its really hard to find a 17" laptop for under $800, so I bought one from NewEgg. If you are interested in buying the laptop from NewEgg, be sure to goto Microsoft Live Cashback search (Google it), so you can save 3-5% off your purchase. I did this and was able to save some money from my purchase.
Hopefully I will be able to post a review of the Extensa when I get it next week.
Saturday, August 23, 2008
Saturday, May 17, 2008
Replacing The Athlon LE-1620
I have had an Athlon LE-1620 for about three or four months now, and it has been one of my favorite processors ever. The large 1mb L2 cache really seems to make the processor scream (for the budget sector) and after comparing benchmarks, the processor at stock speed (2.4ghz) comes out just about dead even with an overclocked Celeron 430 (1.8 ghz base speed, overclocked to 2.38ghz).
While AMD prices have started to go up (AMD is re-releasing older Athlon X2 models in new energy efficient models, and literally doubling the prices; the Athlon LE-1620 is still in production, but the price also has actually gone up a couple dollars since I purchased the chip in January), Intel prices have come down. For the same $45 I paid for the Athlon LE-1620, I can now purchase a new in box Celeron E1200, which is a dual core processor with 512K of L2 cache. This is really impressive, considering AMD has always been the cheaper of the two chipmakers.
I really enjoy the Athlon LE; the large 1mb L2 cache, very cool operating temperatures (I run the chip without a fan on, with Cool 'n Quiet enabled) and overclocking capabilities (If ever needed, the chip has no problem overclocking to 3ghz). At the same time, with the price of Intel dual core chips dropping it seems as if a move back to dual core country is imminent.
I'm in the process of building a computer for my future father in law for Father's Day. I bought several items off of eBay including a Celeron 420 (1.6ghz) for $15 and a Pentium Dual Core e2180 (2.0ghz) for $40. Right now, my plans are giving him the AMD LE-1620 and using the e2180 in my system (with the appropriate motherboards, of course).
I'm going to run various benchmarks between the two systems (the e2180 will be overclocked to either 2.4 ghz or 2.6 ghz) and see how they compare. For some reason, I really can't see how the Athlon LE-1620 is going to compare to a dual core Core based processor (since it was a very close match compared to a single core, Core based Celeron clocked @ 2.38 ghz with only 1/2 the L2 cache [On a side note, at stock speeds, the LE-1620 wipes the floor with a Celeron 430, and would probably destroy a 420 (1.6ghz)]).
AMD lost the performance sector, and it appears that it will be losing the budget sector very soon also.
While AMD prices have started to go up (AMD is re-releasing older Athlon X2 models in new energy efficient models, and literally doubling the prices; the Athlon LE-1620 is still in production, but the price also has actually gone up a couple dollars since I purchased the chip in January), Intel prices have come down. For the same $45 I paid for the Athlon LE-1620, I can now purchase a new in box Celeron E1200, which is a dual core processor with 512K of L2 cache. This is really impressive, considering AMD has always been the cheaper of the two chipmakers.
I really enjoy the Athlon LE; the large 1mb L2 cache, very cool operating temperatures (I run the chip without a fan on, with Cool 'n Quiet enabled) and overclocking capabilities (If ever needed, the chip has no problem overclocking to 3ghz). At the same time, with the price of Intel dual core chips dropping it seems as if a move back to dual core country is imminent.
I'm in the process of building a computer for my future father in law for Father's Day. I bought several items off of eBay including a Celeron 420 (1.6ghz) for $15 and a Pentium Dual Core e2180 (2.0ghz) for $40. Right now, my plans are giving him the AMD LE-1620 and using the e2180 in my system (with the appropriate motherboards, of course).
I'm going to run various benchmarks between the two systems (the e2180 will be overclocked to either 2.4 ghz or 2.6 ghz) and see how they compare. For some reason, I really can't see how the Athlon LE-1620 is going to compare to a dual core Core based processor (since it was a very close match compared to a single core, Core based Celeron clocked @ 2.38 ghz with only 1/2 the L2 cache [On a side note, at stock speeds, the LE-1620 wipes the floor with a Celeron 430, and would probably destroy a 420 (1.6ghz)]).
AMD lost the performance sector, and it appears that it will be losing the budget sector very soon also.
Saturday, May 3, 2008
Waiting For Via Isaiah
It's really weird, but I've personally been waiting for the Via Isaiah processor since it was originally mentioned back in 2004 under the "C4, C5, etc" titles. Via quietly released the C7 processors, which were basically C3s with added features, and have been working on the secret Isaiah platform since.
I've always had a interest in Via processors ever since they came out with the Via C3 socket 370 processors in 2001. The processors were clocked at 500 - 733 mhz, and were quite cheap for the time (under $50), and TigerDirect said they were excellent budget performance processors ( a major lie). At the time, I had a socket 370 533mhz Pentium III processor and because I wasn't the smartest when it came to upgrading PCs at the time, I was planning to purchase a 733mhz C3 processor to replace my PIII.
I ended up not doing it, and instead went on and purchased a 950mhz Duron processor several months later.
In the years following the C3 CPUs, Via continue to release several different C3 and C7 processors, the later being soldered directly on motherboards. As the benchmarks came, these processors were pretty much absolutely terrible, while before they were launched Via would release a couple benchmark graphs trying to state that the processors consumed little power, yet were stronger than Intel's processors in specific benchmarks.
So what am I awaiting the Isaiah processors?
Because of one simple reason; I want to see if Via and Centaur are lying again. Via previously on several times have stated in the past that the C7 processors would be able to reach 2.5ghz, and actually be able to outperform Pentium 4 CPUs. This of course never happend. In the past several months, Via has stated that its new Isaiah architecture is not only cheaper than Intel's offerings, but also stronger in benchmarks. At the same time, Via and Centuar haven't released many 'samples' of the processors, and have provided only a few benchmark results (which could easily be fabricated, as Via has done in the past).
With the Isaiah processors supposedly coming in the very near future, I am anxious to see if Via is simply just lying again, or if they really do have a revolutionary CPU design. Because of the lack of news around the new processors which are again supposed to be released in the next couple of months, I am betting that the Isaiah architecture will just be another low performance processor platform.
But I am still anxiously waiting in hopes that I am wrong. Still, I wouldn't be worried at all if I was Intel, but I would be very worried if I was nVidia after their announcement of the $45 Vista Premium board / cpu / gpu.
I've always had a interest in Via processors ever since they came out with the Via C3 socket 370 processors in 2001. The processors were clocked at 500 - 733 mhz, and were quite cheap for the time (under $50), and TigerDirect said they were excellent budget performance processors ( a major lie). At the time, I had a socket 370 533mhz Pentium III processor and because I wasn't the smartest when it came to upgrading PCs at the time, I was planning to purchase a 733mhz C3 processor to replace my PIII.
I ended up not doing it, and instead went on and purchased a 950mhz Duron processor several months later.
In the years following the C3 CPUs, Via continue to release several different C3 and C7 processors, the later being soldered directly on motherboards. As the benchmarks came, these processors were pretty much absolutely terrible, while before they were launched Via would release a couple benchmark graphs trying to state that the processors consumed little power, yet were stronger than Intel's processors in specific benchmarks.
So what am I awaiting the Isaiah processors?
Because of one simple reason; I want to see if Via and Centaur are lying again. Via previously on several times have stated in the past that the C7 processors would be able to reach 2.5ghz, and actually be able to outperform Pentium 4 CPUs. This of course never happend. In the past several months, Via has stated that its new Isaiah architecture is not only cheaper than Intel's offerings, but also stronger in benchmarks. At the same time, Via and Centuar haven't released many 'samples' of the processors, and have provided only a few benchmark results (which could easily be fabricated, as Via has done in the past).
With the Isaiah processors supposedly coming in the very near future, I am anxious to see if Via is simply just lying again, or if they really do have a revolutionary CPU design. Because of the lack of news around the new processors which are again supposed to be released in the next couple of months, I am betting that the Isaiah architecture will just be another low performance processor platform.
But I am still anxiously waiting in hopes that I am wrong. Still, I wouldn't be worried at all if I was Intel, but I would be very worried if I was nVidia after their announcement of the $45 Vista Premium board / cpu / gpu.
Saturday, March 29, 2008
Athlon LE-1620... Review?
I've had my Athlon LE-1620 processor for over a month now, and I kept saying I was going to post a review of it with a bunch of benchmarks, etc. But I've been busy with school and work (I got a job after debating whether or not I should work this semester; boo)
The Athlon LE-1620 (I paid $46 for it, retail) is a fine single core processor. It comes with a whopping 1mb of L2 cache, which is quite impressive considering it's a) a single core chip, and b) it's an entry level chip.
I don't do a lot of hard core computing, but this chip really impressed me. It's a 90nm chip, and only uses 45 watts, and even though I'm using some generic heatsink compound (I mean, simple white silicon paste I bought a huge tube of for three dollars at Radio Shack) this thing runs at 32 degrees centigrade in a 22 degree room. In other words; it runs pretty darn cool (I'm sure if I used Artic Silver, and a better heatsink, this thing would run near room temperature).
With Cool 'n Quiet on, this thing seems to run constantly @ 1.0 ghz. Not really a problem, since 95% of the time I am just using FireFox, and Notepad. I easily overclocked this thing from 2.4ghz to 2.97 ghz by adjusting the voltage to 1.3v (I couldn't hit 3.0 ghz, mostly because of my use of an improper heatsink compound [although the temperature remained in the mid to high 30s]. I don't currently have the thing overclocked (2.4 ghz is fine for me, and besides I lose the Cool & Quiet function (although my motherboard doesn't turn the fan down at all, anyways).
At stock, it takes the processor 39 seconds to do SuperPI to 1 million digits. When overclocked, it takes the process down to 30 seconds. I haven't screwed around with GeekBench much, so the only score I have for you is one from Linux (scoring an impressive 2578).
You can now find dual core Athlons for $40. The big thing to consider the LE-1640 is the fact that it has 1mb of L2 cache for one core; the dual core chips do have two cores, but only 512k of L2 cache for each. Since I do not use a lot of applications simultaneously, I prefer having the larger L2 cache for the one core, than having dual cores.
If you are building a system and want the best bang for your buck, I would recommend skipping this single core Athlon, and purchasing a cheap Athlon X2. If you are still interested in purchasing an Athlon LE, make sure you purchase one with the 1mb L2 cache; apparently AMD is now selling single core Athlons under the LE title based on the 65nm design, and only having 512K of L2 cache.
The Athlon LE-1620 (I paid $46 for it, retail) is a fine single core processor. It comes with a whopping 1mb of L2 cache, which is quite impressive considering it's a) a single core chip, and b) it's an entry level chip.
I don't do a lot of hard core computing, but this chip really impressed me. It's a 90nm chip, and only uses 45 watts, and even though I'm using some generic heatsink compound (I mean, simple white silicon paste I bought a huge tube of for three dollars at Radio Shack) this thing runs at 32 degrees centigrade in a 22 degree room. In other words; it runs pretty darn cool (I'm sure if I used Artic Silver, and a better heatsink, this thing would run near room temperature).
With Cool 'n Quiet on, this thing seems to run constantly @ 1.0 ghz. Not really a problem, since 95% of the time I am just using FireFox, and Notepad. I easily overclocked this thing from 2.4ghz to 2.97 ghz by adjusting the voltage to 1.3v (I couldn't hit 3.0 ghz, mostly because of my use of an improper heatsink compound [although the temperature remained in the mid to high 30s]. I don't currently have the thing overclocked (2.4 ghz is fine for me, and besides I lose the Cool & Quiet function (although my motherboard doesn't turn the fan down at all, anyways).
At stock, it takes the processor 39 seconds to do SuperPI to 1 million digits. When overclocked, it takes the process down to 30 seconds. I haven't screwed around with GeekBench much, so the only score I have for you is one from Linux (scoring an impressive 2578).
You can now find dual core Athlons for $40. The big thing to consider the LE-1640 is the fact that it has 1mb of L2 cache for one core; the dual core chips do have two cores, but only 512k of L2 cache for each. Since I do not use a lot of applications simultaneously, I prefer having the larger L2 cache for the one core, than having dual cores.
If you are building a system and want the best bang for your buck, I would recommend skipping this single core Athlon, and purchasing a cheap Athlon X2. If you are still interested in purchasing an Athlon LE, make sure you purchase one with the 1mb L2 cache; apparently AMD is now selling single core Athlons under the LE title based on the 65nm design, and only having 512K of L2 cache.
Saturday, March 22, 2008
Microsoft Ergonomic Keyboard 4000 = Bad
I purchased a new mouse a week or so ago; a Kensington wireless mouse (the exact model eludes my mind right now). It is one of the best mice I have ever used. After purchasing the mouse, I decided maybe it was time to look into purchasing a new keyboard, after all I have been using the same Compaq keyboard since 2003.
I didn't want to spend much money (the mouse was $35), and after browsing buy.com, I found that I could get $50 off a $51 purchase by signing up for the new Revolution credit card (which to me, there is nothing really revolutionary about it, besides the free $50 credit).
I ended up purchasing (or rather getting for free) the Microsoft Natural Ergonomic Keyboard 4000. Buy.com wanted $47 for it, so I added a Sandisk MP3 player that was $13 to meet the minimum purchase requirement (to get the free $50 credit).
I was really surprised that the order shipped the same day, and I actually received it the very next day. It was the fastest order I had ever received from buy.com (typically I have to wait 10 days, but the keyboard was shipped from a warehouse about 100 miles away).
Installing the Microsoft software was a huge pain. I only had a Microsoft keyboard, not a Microsoft mouse, yet the software insisted on installing the Intellipoint software. At the same time, M$ decided to uninstall my other mouse software (from Logitech, for my older mouse).
After I finally had the software installed, the next task was reprogramming some of the keys, specifically the zoom wheel into a scroll wheel. A couple of searches on Google, and my keys were reprogrammed. I used the keyboard for a couple of hours, and was finally getting used to the ergonomic design, and all the extra buttons.
Then, today, out of nowhere my "C" key does not work. I used the diagnostics program that came with the keyboard, and the key does not register when pressed. I reinstalled the drivers, etc, but the darn "C" key just wouldn't work.
I contacted Microsoft's support, and was told that I should 'set the keyboard upside down to let the liquid come out'. I wasn't sure of what liquid they were talking about, but apparently they assumed I spilled something on the keyboard in the 48 hours I have owned it.
I have a question for Microsoft. Why do all of your new products suck? I mean Vista is horrible, and this new keyboard shouldn't break after being used (very briefly) for only two days. It's not like the (what are now) old days of Windows XP and those Microsoft Optical Mouse I could throw against the wall and have them still function perfectly. You guys really need to get your act together. I don't plan on buying any more Microsoft keyboard / mouse / operating systems in the near future.
I didn't want to spend much for a new keyboard (I'm perfectly content with the five year old Compaq keyboard), and I don't want to waste money shipping the keyboard to Microsoft / Buydotcom. The keyboard was free, but I'm still pretty angry. I guess I would really be mad if I actually paid $50 for it.
I don't know what to do with it. I remapped the Windows key to function as the "C" key, but that's a worthless fix. It was a really nice keyboard for the whole three hours I used it. Who knows, maybe it will work tomorrow. If it does regain "C" key function, I will probably unload the thing on eBay and use the money towards a new LCD monitor.
I didn't want to spend much money (the mouse was $35), and after browsing buy.com, I found that I could get $50 off a $51 purchase by signing up for the new Revolution credit card (which to me, there is nothing really revolutionary about it, besides the free $50 credit).
I ended up purchasing (or rather getting for free) the Microsoft Natural Ergonomic Keyboard 4000. Buy.com wanted $47 for it, so I added a Sandisk MP3 player that was $13 to meet the minimum purchase requirement (to get the free $50 credit).
I was really surprised that the order shipped the same day, and I actually received it the very next day. It was the fastest order I had ever received from buy.com (typically I have to wait 10 days, but the keyboard was shipped from a warehouse about 100 miles away).
Installing the Microsoft software was a huge pain. I only had a Microsoft keyboard, not a Microsoft mouse, yet the software insisted on installing the Intellipoint software. At the same time, M$ decided to uninstall my other mouse software (from Logitech, for my older mouse).
After I finally had the software installed, the next task was reprogramming some of the keys, specifically the zoom wheel into a scroll wheel. A couple of searches on Google, and my keys were reprogrammed. I used the keyboard for a couple of hours, and was finally getting used to the ergonomic design, and all the extra buttons.
Then, today, out of nowhere my "C" key does not work. I used the diagnostics program that came with the keyboard, and the key does not register when pressed. I reinstalled the drivers, etc, but the darn "C" key just wouldn't work.
I contacted Microsoft's support, and was told that I should 'set the keyboard upside down to let the liquid come out'. I wasn't sure of what liquid they were talking about, but apparently they assumed I spilled something on the keyboard in the 48 hours I have owned it.
I have a question for Microsoft. Why do all of your new products suck? I mean Vista is horrible, and this new keyboard shouldn't break after being used (very briefly) for only two days. It's not like the (what are now) old days of Windows XP and those Microsoft Optical Mouse I could throw against the wall and have them still function perfectly. You guys really need to get your act together. I don't plan on buying any more Microsoft keyboard / mouse / operating systems in the near future.
I didn't want to spend much for a new keyboard (I'm perfectly content with the five year old Compaq keyboard), and I don't want to waste money shipping the keyboard to Microsoft / Buydotcom. The keyboard was free, but I'm still pretty angry. I guess I would really be mad if I actually paid $50 for it.
I don't know what to do with it. I remapped the Windows key to function as the "C" key, but that's a worthless fix. It was a really nice keyboard for the whole three hours I used it. Who knows, maybe it will work tomorrow. If it does regain "C" key function, I will probably unload the thing on eBay and use the money towards a new LCD monitor.
Saturday, March 8, 2008
Running Haiku-OS Within Windows
Someone asked me about trying out the Haiku operating system a couple days ago. They were interested in trying it out, but didn't know how to go about doing it, so I decided I would make a video. This video shows you how you can run Haiku-OS (an open source version of the wonderful BeOS) on your Windows machine using the free software Vmware Player.
In case you are too lazy to watch the video, these are the steps to achieve success.
1. Obtain and install VMware Player for free from www.vmware.com/downloads (Installation requires reboot).
2. Obtain Haiku-OS vmware image (NOT RAW HDD IMAGE!) from www.haiku-os.org/downloads
3. Uncompress the Haiku-OS files, double click on the configuration file.
4. If prompted, select the virtual drive image.
5. Success! Haiku OS will boot in the virtual machine. Press Ctrl-Alt to change between controlling your computer and the virtual machine.
Haiku-OS is a really nice alternative operating system. I was a big fan of the original BeOS back in 1999-2001. It's really cool that there's still a community supporting BeOS (which by every account was a much better OS compared to Windows in its day).
In case you are too lazy to watch the video, these are the steps to achieve success.
1. Obtain and install VMware Player for free from www.vmware.com/downloads (Installation requires reboot).
2. Obtain Haiku-OS vmware image (NOT RAW HDD IMAGE!) from www.haiku-os.org/downloads
3. Uncompress the Haiku-OS files, double click on the configuration file.
4. If prompted, select the virtual drive image.
5. Success! Haiku OS will boot in the virtual machine. Press Ctrl-Alt to change between controlling your computer and the virtual machine.
Haiku-OS is a really nice alternative operating system. I was a big fan of the original BeOS back in 1999-2001. It's really cool that there's still a community supporting BeOS (which by every account was a much better OS compared to Windows in its day).
Touchscreen For eeePC
I was originally planning on purchasing a 7" touch screen kit off of eBay to install in my eeePC, but after careful analysis I have decided against it. While a touchscreen would be a nifty feature to have on the small eeePC, it's a novelty idea at best. Because the eeePC has a trackpad and a keyboard I doubt I would even bother using the touchscreen.
Another reason why I didn't attempt the project was because I didn't want to risk bricking (breaking) my $350 device. While it's true, a lot of people have successfully completed this 'hack', a quick search on eeepcuser.com reveals that a lot of people have also rendered their eeePC's useless.
The eeePC is a fragile device. People need to remember this. If you aren't an experienced solderer, then frankly you should stay away from attempting this mod. Also, keep in mind a lot of people have successfully installed a touchscreen in their eeePC, but ended up shorting out their eeePCs because the touchscreen wires came out of their soldering points and shorted the motherboard.
I'm not attempting this project because, 1. I don't really need a touchscreen, and 2. I don't want to risk damaging my eeePC.
Another reason why I didn't attempt the project was because I didn't want to risk bricking (breaking) my $350 device. While it's true, a lot of people have successfully completed this 'hack', a quick search on eeepcuser.com reveals that a lot of people have also rendered their eeePC's useless.
The eeePC is a fragile device. People need to remember this. If you aren't an experienced solderer, then frankly you should stay away from attempting this mod. Also, keep in mind a lot of people have successfully installed a touchscreen in their eeePC, but ended up shorting out their eeePCs because the touchscreen wires came out of their soldering points and shorted the motherboard.
I'm not attempting this project because, 1. I don't really need a touchscreen, and 2. I don't want to risk damaging my eeePC.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)